A Tale of Two Stories from “Below the Line”

This article analyzes the nature of debate on “below the line” comment fields at the United Kingdom’s Guardian, and how, if at all, such debates are impacting journalism practice. The article combines a content analysis of 3,792 comments across eighty-five articles that focused on the UN Climate Change Summit, with ten interviews with journalists, two with affiliated commentators, plus the community manager. The results suggest a more positive picture than has been found by many existing studies: Debates were often deliberative in nature, and journalists reported that it was positively impacting their practice in several ways, including providing new story leads and enhanced critical reflection. However, citizen–journalist debate was limited. The results are attributed to the normalization of comment fields into everyday journalism practice, extensive support and encouragement from senior management, and a realization that comment fields can actually make the journalists’ life a little easier.

[1]  Todd Graham,et al.  Discursive Equality and Everyday Talk Online: The Impact of "Superparticipants" , 2014, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[2]  Dominique Brossard,et al.  The "Nasty Effect: " Online Incivility and Risk Perceptions of Emerging Technologies , 2014, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[3]  A. Bergström,et al.  Beneficial yet crappy: Journalists and audiences on obstacles and opportunities in reader comments , 2015 .

[4]  Neil Thurman,et al.  Forums for citizen journalists? Adoption of user generated content initiatives by online news media , 2008, New Media Soc..

[5]  Thorsten Quandt,et al.  PARTICIPATORY JOURNALISM PRACTICES IN THE MEDIA AND BEYOND , 2008 .

[6]  Todd Graham What’s Reality Television Got to Do with it? Talking Politics in the Net-Based Public Sphere , 2011 .

[7]  P. Delache,et al.  Making news , 1983, Nature.

[8]  Stephen D. Reese,et al.  Journalists as Gatekeepers , 2008, The Handbook of Journalism Studies.

[9]  C. Ruiz,et al.  Public Sphere 2.0? The Democratic Qualities of Citizen Debates in Online Newspapers , 2011 .

[10]  P. Mayring Qualitative Content Analysis , 2000 .

[11]  Neil Thurman,et al.  A CLASH OF CULTURES , 2008 .

[12]  Mark Deuze,et al.  The Web and its Journalisms: Considering the Consequences of Different Types of Newsmedia Online , 2003, New Media Soc..

[13]  Nicholas Davies,et al.  Flat Earth News: An Award-Winning Reporter Exposes Falsehood, Distortion and Propaganda in the Global Media , 2008 .

[14]  A. Hermida Mechanisms of Participation , 2011 .

[15]  Axel Bruns,et al.  Gatewatching: Collaborative Online News Production , 2005 .

[16]  J. Loke OLD TURF, NEW NEIGHBORS , 2012 .

[17]  Scott Wright,et al.  Politics as usual? Revolution, normalization and a new agenda for online deliberation , 2012, New Media Soc..

[18]  Dan Gillmor,et al.  We the media - grassroots journalism by the people, for the people , 2006 .

[19]  Sanna Trygg,et al.  Is comment free? Ethical, editorial and political problems of moderating online news , 2012 .

[20]  J. Singer,et al.  “Comment Is Free, but Facts Are Sacred”: User-generated Content and Ethical Constructs at the Guardian , 2009 .

[21]  James N. Druckman,et al.  Political Preference Formation: Competition, Deliberation, and the (Ir)relevance of Framing Effects , 2004, American Political Science Review.

[22]  Angela Phillips,et al.  Old Sources: New Bottles , 2010 .

[23]  Brian Winston,et al.  Media,Technology and Society : A History: From the Telegraph to the Internet , 1998 .

[24]  Eun-Ju Lee,et al.  What Do Others’ Reactions to News on Internet Portal Sites Tell Us? Effects of Presentation Format and Readers’ Need for Cognition on Reality Perception , 2010, Commun. Res..

[25]  Jackie Harrison,et al.  USER-GENERATED CONTENT AND GATEKEEPING AT THE BBC HUB , 2010 .

[26]  Lily Canter,et al.  THE MISCONCEPTION OF ONLINE COMMENT THREADS , 2013 .

[27]  Arthur D. Santana Virtuous or Vitriolic , 2014 .

[28]  Marie-Claire Shanahan,et al.  Changing the meaning of peer-to-peer? Exploring online comment spaces as sites of negotiated expertise , 2010 .

[29]  Luke C. Collins,et al.  Examining User Comments for Deliberative Democracy: A Corpus-driven Analysis of the Climate Change Debate Online , 2015, Climate Change Communication and the Internet.

[30]  Zvi Reich,et al.  User Comments: The Transformation of Participatory Space , 2011 .

[31]  Alfred Hermida,et al.  THE BLOGGING BBC , 2009 .

[32]  Sue Robinson,et al.  Traditionalists vs. Convergers , 2010 .

[33]  J. Loke Readers' Debate a Local Murder Trial: “Race” in the Online Public Sphere , 2013 .

[34]  D. Gillmor We the Media , 2004 .

[35]  J. Habermas,et al.  The structural transformation of the public sphere : an inquiryinto a category of bourgeois society , 1991 .

[36]  Scott Wright,et al.  Democracy, deliberation and design: the case of online discussion forums , 2007, New Media Soc..

[37]  Caitlin Evans Wagner,et al.  The hybrid media system: Politics and power , 2014, New Media Soc..

[38]  Ian Rowe,et al.  Civility 2.0: a comparative analysis of incivility in online political discussion , 2015 .

[39]  Axel Bruns,et al.  PREPARING FOR AN AGE OF PARTICIPATORY NEWS , 2007 .

[40]  Henrik Örnebring,et al.  USER-GENERATED CONTENT AND THE NEWS , 2011 .

[41]  B. D. Waal The people formerly known as the audience , 2008 .

[42]  Pablo J. Boczkowski,et al.  How Users Take Advantage of Different Forms of Interactivity on Online News Sites: Clicking, E-Mailing, and Commenting. , 2012 .